Sign of the Times: “US Says Anti-Nazi Resolution at U.N. Restricts Free Speech”

“The Unit­ed States was one of three coun­tries to vote against a U.N. res­o­lu­tion con­demn­ing the glo­ri­fi­ca­tion of Nazism on Thurs­day, cit­ing free­dom of speech issues and con­cerns Rus­sia was using it to car­ry out polit­i­cal attacks against its neigh­bors. The res­o­lu­tion enti­tled ‘Com­bat­ing glo­ri­fi­ca­tion of Nazism, Neo-Nazism and oth­er prac­tices that con­tribute to fuel­ing con­tem­po­rary forms of racism, racial dis­crim­i­na­tion, xeno­pho­bia and relat­ed intol­er­ance,’ was approved by the U.N.’s human rights com­mit­tee on Fri­day with 131 in favor, 3 against with 48 absten­tions. Ukraine and Palau were the oth­er no votes. . . .” This was the sec­ond time in three years that the U.S. vetoed such a res­o­lu­tion. All of the con­tents of this web­site as of 12/19/2014–Dave Emory’s 35+ years of research and broadcasting–as well as hours of video­taped lec­tures are avail­able on a 32GB flash dri­ve. Dave offers his pro­grams and arti­cles for free–your sup­port is very much appre­ci­at­ed.

FTR #930 The Trumpenkampfverbande, Part 9: Alfa Males, Part 3 (German Ostpolitik, Part 3)

With the (jus­ti­fi­able) out­rage swirling around FBI direc­tor (and Mitt Rom­ney backer) James Comey’s pub­lic dis­cus­sion of the dis­cov­ery of more of Hillary Clin­ton’s e‑mails hav­ing been dis­cov­ered, anoth­er elec­tion-relat­ed inves­ti­ga­tion has gone large­ly unex­am­ined. Indeed, the impor­tance of the inves­ti­ga­tion has been down­played.

Com­put­er experts dis­cov­ered a link between a serv­er reg­is­tered to the Trump orga­ni­za­tion and two servers reg­is­tered to the Alfa Bank in Moscow, a bank that is part of the Alfa con­glom­er­ate dis­cussed in FTR #‘s 530 and 573.

In the Foer piece, and in attempt­ed dis­cred­it­ing arti­cles of same, it is appar­ent that the inves­ti­ga­tors do not under­stand the nature of the enti­ty they are inves­ti­gat­ing. The jour­nal­is­tic “spin” put on Alfa in the cov­er­age is “Russia/Putin/Kremlin” new Cold War con­text. Alfa is very, very dif­fer­ent.

In FTR #‘s 530, 573 we examnined the nature of Alfa’s his­to­ry, oper­a­tions and insti­tu­tion­al and eco­nom­ic foun­da­tions. It is any­thing BUT “Kremlin/Putin/Russia.”

It appears to be Under­ground Reich, all the way, with evi­den­tiary trib­u­taries run­ning in the direc­tion of: the Iran-Con­tra scan­dal; the Iraq­gate scan­dal; the oil-for-food scam vis a vis Iraq; malfeasanace by a coterie of GOP big­wigs includ­ing Dick Cheney and oth­ers close to George W. Bush, and Haley Bar­bour; mon­ey-laun­der­ing by pow­er­ful inter­na­tion­al drug syn­di­cates; Chechen war­lords and drug-traf­fick­ing syn­di­cates; the Roy­al fam­i­ly of Liecht­en­stein; the Bank al-Taqwa (which helped finance al-Qae­da); the Marc Rich oper­a­tions; East­ern Euro­pean and Russ­ian asso­ciates of Wolf­gang Bohringer, one of Mohamed Atta’s close asso­ciates in South Flori­da; and the Carl Duis­berg Fel­low­ship, which brought Mohamed Atta to Ger­many from Egypt and may have helped him into the U.S.

The pro­gram high­lights major aspects of the inves­ti­ga­tion into the Alfa/Trump link:

The Trump/Alfa link was not a mal­ware attack, as some of the com­put­er sci­en­tists ini­tial­ly thought: ” . . . . The researchers quick­ly dis­missed their ini­tial fear that the logs rep­re­sent­ed a mal­ware attack. The com­mu­ni­ca­tion wasn’t the work of bots. The irreg­u­lar pat­tern of serv­er lookups actu­al­ly resem­bled the pat­tern of human conversation—conversations that began dur­ing office hours in New York and con­tin­ued dur­ing office hours in Moscow. It dawned on the researchers that this wasn’t an attack, but a sus­tained rela­tion­ship between a serv­er reg­is­tered to the Trump Orga­ni­za­tion and two servers reg­is­tered to an enti­ty called Alfa Bank. . . .”

The set-up was high­ly unusu­al: ” . . . . The researchers had ini­tial­ly stum­bled in their diag­no­sis because of the odd con­fig­u­ra­tion of Trump’s serv­er. ‘I’ve nev­er seen a serv­er set up like that,’ says Christo­pher Davis, who runs the cyber­se­cu­ri­ty firm HYAS InfoS­ec Inc. and won a FBI Direc­tor Award for Excel­lence for his work track­ing down the authors of one of the world’s nas­ti­est bot­net attacks. ‘It looked weird, and it didn’t pass the sniff test.’ The serv­er was first reg­is­tered to Trump’s busi­ness in 2009 and was set up to run con­sumer mar­ket­ing cam­paigns. It had a his­to­ry of send­ing mass emails on behalf of Trump-brand­ed prop­er­ties and prod­ucts. Researchers were ulti­mate­ly con­vinced that the serv­er indeed belonged to Trump. (Click here to see the server’s reg­is­tra­tion record.) But now this capa­cious serv­er han­dled a strange­ly small load of traf­fic, such a small load that it would be hard for a com­pa­ny to jus­ti­fy the expense and trou­ble it would take to main­tain it. ‘I get more mail in a day than the serv­er han­dled,’ Davis says. . . .”
The arti­cle details more unusu­al aspects of the link: ” . . . . That wasn’t the only odd­i­ty. When the researchers pinged the serv­er, they received error mes­sages. They con­clud­ed that the serv­er was set to accept only incom­ing com­mu­ni­ca­tion from a very small hand­ful of IP address­es. . . . Eighty-sev­en per­cent of the DNS lookups involved the two Alfa Bank servers. ‘It’s pret­ty clear that it’s not an open mail serv­er,’ Camp told me. ‘These orga­ni­za­tions are com­mu­ni­cat­ing in a way designed to block oth­er peo­ple out.’ . . . .”

Paul Vixie–one of the pre­mier experts in the field–felt the con­nec­tion was high­ly unusu­al: ” . . . . Ear­li­er this month, the group of com­put­er sci­en­tists passed the logs to Paul Vix­ie. In the world of DNS experts, there’s no high­er author­i­ty. Vix­ie wrote cen­tral strands of the DNS code that makes the inter­net work. After study­ing the logs, he con­clud­ed, ‘The par­ties were com­mu­ni­cat­ing in a secre­tive fash­ion. The oper­a­tive word is secre­tive. This is more akin to what crim­i­nal syn­di­cates do if they are putting togeth­er a project.’ Put dif­fer­ent­ly, the logs sug­gest­ed that Trump and Alfa had con­fig­ured some­thing like a dig­i­tal hot­line con­nect­ing the two enti­ties, shut­ting out the rest of the world, and designed to obscure its own exis­tence. . . .”

The avail­able evi­dence indi­cates that the hookup indi­cat­ed “human-lev­el com­mu­ni­ca­tion”: ” . . . I put the ques­tion of what kind of activ­i­ty the logs record­ed to the Uni­ver­si­ty of California’s Nicholas Weaver, anoth­er com­put­er sci­en­tist not involved in com­pil­ing the logs. ‘I can’t attest to the logs them­selves,’ he told me, ‘but assum­ing they are legit­i­mate they do indi­cate effec­tive­ly human-lev­el com­mu­ni­ca­tion.’ . . . ”

More about the nature of the com­mu­ni­ca­tion, from the sci­en­tist using the code-name “Tea Leaves”: ” . . . . Tea Leaves and his col­leagues plot­ted the data from the logs on a time­line. What it illus­trat­ed was sug­ges­tive: The con­ver­sa­tion between the Trump and Alfa servers appeared to fol­low the con­tours of polit­i­cal hap­pen­ings in the Unit­ed States. ‘At elec­tion-relat­ed moments, the traf­fic peaked,’ accord­ing to Camp. There were con­sid­er­ably more DNS lookups, for instance, dur­ing the two con­ven­tions. . . .”

The sci­en­tists attempt­ed to get the pub­lic to pay atten­tion to their inves­ti­ga­tion and New York Times writ­ers turned their atten­tion to the case: ” . . . In Sep­tem­ber, the sci­en­tists tried to get the pub­lic to pay atten­tion to their data. One of them post­ed a link to the logs in a Red­dit thread. Around the same time, the New York Times’ Eric Licht­blau and Steven Lee Myers began chas­ing the sto­ry.* (They are still pur­su­ing it.) Licht­blau met with a Wash­ing­ton rep­re­sen­ta­tive of Alfa Bank on Sept. 21, and the bank denied hav­ing any con­nec­tion to Trump. . . .”

Things got “inter­est­ing” after that. Accord­ing to the com­put­er sci­en­tists, the Trump Orga­ni­za­tion shut down the serv­er! As the bril­liant Berke­ley researcher Peter Dale Scott not­ed, in a dif­fer­ent con­text, “The cov­er-up obvi­ates the con­spir­a­cy. ” . . . . In Sep­tem­ber, the sci­en­tists tried to get the pub­lic to pay atten­tion to their data. One of them post­ed a link to the logs in a Red­dit thread. Around the same time, the New York Times’ Eric Licht­blau and Steven Lee Myers began chas­ing the sto­ry.* (They are still pur­su­ing it.) Licht­blau met with a Wash­ing­ton rep­re­sen­ta­tive of Alfa Bank on Sept. 21, and the bank denied hav­ing any con­nec­tion to Trump. . . . The com­put­er sci­en­tists believe there was one log­i­cal con­clu­sion to be drawn: The Trump Orga­ni­za­tion shut down the serv­er after Alfa was told that the Times might expose the con­nec­tion. Weaver told me the Trump domain was ‘very slop­pi­ly removed.’ Or as anoth­er of the researchers put it, it looked like ‘the knee was hit in Moscow, the leg kicked in New York.’. . . . Four days lat­er, on Sept. 27, the Trump Orga­ni­za­tion cre­at­ed a new host name, trump1.contact-client.com, which enabled com­mu­ni­ca­tion to the very same serv­er via a dif­fer­ent route. When a new host name is cre­at­ed, the first com­mu­ni­ca­tion with it is nev­er ran­dom. To reach the serv­er after the reset­ting of the host name, the sender of the first inbound mail has to first learn of the name some­how. It’s sim­ply impos­si­ble to ran­dom­ly reach a renamed serv­er. ‘That par­ty had to have some kind of out­bound mes­sage through SMS, phone, or some non­in­ter­net chan­nel they used to com­mu­ni­cate [the new con­fig­u­ra­tion],’ Paul Vix­ie told me. The first attempt to look up the revised host name came from Alfa Bank. ‘If this was a pub­lic serv­er, we would have seen oth­er traces,’ Vix­ie says. ‘The only look-ups came from this par­tic­u­lar source.‘According to Vix­ie and oth­ers, the new host name may have rep­re­sent­ed an attempt to estab­lish a new chan­nel of com­mu­ni­ca­tion. But media inquiries into the nature of Trump’s rela­tion­ship with Alfa Bank, which sug­gest­ed that their com­mu­ni­ca­tions were being mon­i­tored, may have deterred the par­ties from using it. Soon after the New York Times began to ask ques­tions, the traf­fic between the servers stopped cold. . . .”

Not sur­pris­ing­ly, the FBI has dis­missed the rel­e­vance of the com­put­er link.

This dis­missal comes against the back­ground of sev­er­al late-break­ing devel­op­ments:

The unsuc­cess­ful attempt by Alfa sub­sidiary Crown Resources to buy Marc Rich’s com­modi­ties firm: ” . . . A deal to sell the Swiss-based com­modi­ties oper­a­tion of for­mer U.S. fugi­tive financier Marc Rich to Rus­sia-owned ener­gy trad­ing group Crown Resources is off. . . . Crown is owned by the Alfa Group con­glom­er­ate. . . . .”

The sub­se­quent suc­cess­ful attempt by Alfa play­er Mikhail Frid­man to pur­chase the Marc Rich firm: ” . . . Mikhail Frid­man: ‘Defen­dant Mikhail Frid­man cur­rent­ly serves as Chair­man of the Board of Direc­tors of co-con­spir­a­tor Alfa Bank and as Chair­man of the Board of Direc­tors of Defen­dant Con­sor­tium Alfa Group. Frid­man fur­ther served on the Board of Vim­pel­Com, a NYSE com­pa­ny, and has con­trol over Gold­en Tele­com, a NASDAQ com­pa­ny ... pur­chased the Unit­ed States trad­ing firm owned by Amer­i­can, Mark Rich, the one time com­modi­ties baron par­doned by Pres­i­dent Clin­ton with much con­tro­ver­sy. . . .”

The FBI’s long-dor­mant Twit­ter account began tweet­ing files about Bill Clin­ton’s par­don of Marc Rich, short­ly after the offi­cial dis­missal of inves­ti­ga­tions into the Alfa/Trump link: ” . . . . Now, a new inter­a­gency mys­tery is rais­ing ques­tions about whether the F.B.I. has become politi­cized, just days before the pres­i­den­tial elec­tion. On Sun­day, a long-dor­mant F.B.I. Twit­ter account sud­den­ly sprung to life, blast­ing out a series of links to case files that cast the Clin­tons in a decid­ed­ly neg­a­tive light. . . . Then, on Tues­day, the “FBI Records Vault” account—which had not tweet­ed at all between Octo­ber 2015 and Sunday—published a link to records relat­ed to the 15-year-old, long-closed inves­ti­ga­tion into for­mer Pres­i­dent Bill Clinton’s par­don­ing of one­time com­modi­ties trad­er turned fugi­tive Marc Rich. The post, which was quick­ly retweet­ed thou­sands of times, links to a heav­i­ly redact­ed doc­u­ment that repeat­ed­ly ref­er­ences the agency’s “Pub­lic Cor­rup­tion” unit—less-than-ideal optics for Hillary Clin­ton, who has spent her entire cam­paign fight­ing her image as a cor­rupt politi­cian. . . .”

FBI Direc­tor James Comey was in charge of the orig­i­nal Marc Rich inves­ti­ga­tion and the par­don of Rich by Bill Clin­ton. Is there a con­nec­tion between the offi­cial dis­missal of the inves­ti­ga­tion into the Alfa/Trump link by the FBI, the tweet­ing by the FBI of the files on the Clin­ton par­don of Marc Rich and the fact that it was Comey who presided over the Marc Rich inves­ti­ga­tions? ” . . . . In 2002, Comey, then a fed­er­al pros­e­cu­tor, took over an inves­ti­ga­tion into Pres­i­dent Bill Clin­ton’s 2001 par­don of financier Marc Rich, who had been indict­ed on a laun­dry list of charges before flee­ing the coun­try. The deci­sion set off a polit­i­cal firestorm focused on accu­sa­tions that Rich’s ex-wife Denise made dona­tions to the Demo­c­ra­t­ic Par­ty, the Clin­ton Library and Hillary Clin­ton’s 2000 Sen­ate cam­paign as part of a plan to get Rich off the hook. Comey ulti­mate­ly decid­ed not to pur­sue the case. The kick­er: Comey him­self had over­seen Rich’s pros­e­cu­tion between 1987 and 1993. . . .”

Pro­gram High­lights Include: details of the Carl Duis­berg Soci­ety’s links to Atta and to major Ger­man cor­po­ra­tions; dis­cus­sion of the Alfa Fel­lowhip against the back­ground of Ger­man Ost­poli­tik dis­cussed in FTR #‘s 918 and 919; detailed analy­sis of Vik­tor Kozeny asso­ciates Frid­man and (Pyotr) Aven (Kozeny employed Bohringer as a pilot); a sum­ma­ry analy­sis of the major points in FTR #‘s 530 and 573.

FTR #926 Painting Oswald “Red,” Part 2: “Oswald” in Mexico City

Just as JFK’s assassination–pinned on the ersatz Com­mu­nist Lee Har­vey Oswald–destroyed JFK’s attempts at detente with the Sovi­et Union, the “op” front­ed for by Edward Snowden–the “Obverse Oswald”–destroyed the Obama/Clinton State Depart­men­t’s attempts at a “re-boot” with Rus­sia. This pro­gram is the sec­ond in a series review­ing how Oswald was “paint­ed red.” For pur­pos­es of con­ve­nience and con­ti­nu­ity, we begin the dis­cus­sion by review­ing and syn­op­siz­ing infor­ma­tion indi­cat­ing that Rus­sia has been framed for the “Shad­ow Bro­kers” alleged hack of the NSA, much as it appears to have been framed for the DNC hack.

Indeed, with both the DNC hack and the “Shad­ow Bro­kers” non-hack of the NSA, the evi­dence points increas­ing­ly toward “Team Snow­den” (includ­ing Wik­iLeaks) and Eddie the Friend­ly Spook him­self. The process of pro­pa­gan­diz­ing the high-pro­file hacks as effect­ed by “Rus­sia” is anal­o­gous to the “paint­ing of Oswald Red.” This broad­cast details a vis­it to Mex­i­co City by “Oswald,” in which the pat­sy-to-be of the JFK assas­si­na­tion went to lengths to rein­force the image of a Com­mu­nist, linked to, among oth­er ele­ments, the KGB’s assas­si­na­tion expert Valery Kostikov.

The “Oswald” oper­at­ing in Mex­i­co City did not look like Oswald: ” . . . He was described as ‘appar­ent age 35, ath­let­ic build, cir­ca 6 feet, reced­ing hair­line, bald­ing top.’ In a CIA cable back to Mex­i­co City on Octo­ber 10, the Lee Oswald who defect­ed to the U.S.S.R. in Octo­ber 1959 was described as not quite 24, ‘five feet ten inch­es, one hun­dred six­ty five pounds, light brown wavy hair, blue eyes.’ . . .” He did not speak like Oswald: ” . . . . Equal­ly note­wor­thy in the Octo­ber 9 cable is the evi­dence it pro­vides that the “Lee Oswald” who made the Octo­ber 1 phone call was an impos­tor. The caller, it said, “spoke bro­ken Russ­ian.” The real Oswald was flu­ent in Russ­ian. . . .”

The “Oswald” in Mex­i­co City had unusu­al cre­den­tials: ” . . . [Cuban diplo­mat Sil­via] Duran was a lit­tle sus­pi­cious of Oswald. She felt the Amer­i­can was too eager in dis­play­ing his left­ist cre­den­tials: mem­ber­ship cards in the Fair Play for Cuba Com­mit­tee and the Amer­i­can Com­mu­nist Par­ty, old Sovi­et doc­u­ments, a news­pa­per clip­ping on his arrest in New Orleans, a pho­to of Oswald being escort­ed by a police­man on each arm that Duran thought looked Pho­ny. Duran also knew that belong­ing to the Com­mu­nist Par­ty was ille­gal in Mex­i­co in 1963. For that rea­son, a Com­mu­nist would nor­mal­ly trav­el in the coun­try with only a pass­port. Yet here was Oswald doc­u­ment­ed in a way that invit­ed his arrest. . . .”

The “Oswald” in Mex­i­co City dis­played unusu­al behav­ior: ” . . . He took a revolver from his jack­et pock­et, placed it on a table, and said, ‘See? This is what I must now car­ry to pro­tect my life.’ The Sovi­et offi­cials care­ful­ly took the gun and removed its bul­lets. They told Oswald once again they could not give him a quick visa. They offered him instead the nec­es­sary forms to be filled out. Oswald did­n’t take them. Oleg Nechiporenko joined the three men as their con­ver­sa­tion was end­ing. For the sec­ond day in a row, he accom­pa­nied a depressed Oswald to the gate of the embassy, this time with Oswald’s returned revolver and its loose bul­lets stuck back in his jack­et pock­et. Nechiporenko says that he, Kostikov, and Yatskov then imme­di­ate­ly pre­pared a report on Oswald’s two embassy vis­its that they cabled to Moscow Cen­ter. . . .”

A CIA tele­phon­ic inter­cept of the “Oswald” appears to have been a fab­ri­ca­tion: ” . . . . The CIA’s tran­script states that the Sat­ur­day, Sep­tem­ber 28, call came from the Cuban Con­sulate. The first speak­er is iden­ti­fied as Sil­via Duran. How­ev­er, Sil­via Duran has insist­ed repeat­ed­ly over the years, first, that the Cuban Embassy was closed to the pub­lic on Sat­ur­days, and sec­ond, that she nev­er took part in such a call. ‘Duran’ is said to be phon­ing the Sovi­et Con­sulate. Oleg Nechiporenko denies in turn that this call occurred. He says it was impos­si­ble because the Sovi­et switch­board was closed. The ‘Duran’ speak­er in the tran­script says that an Amer­i­can in her con­sulate, who had been in the Sovi­et Embassy, wants to talk to them. She pass­es the phone to a North Amer­i­can man. The Amer­i­can insists that he and the Sovi­et rep­re­sen­ta­tive speak Russ­ian. They engage in a con­ver­sa­tion, with the Amer­i­can speak­ing with the trans­la­tor describes as ‘ter­ri­ble hard­ly rec­og­niz­able Russ­ian.’ This once again argues against the speak­er being Oswald, giv­en his flu­ent Russ­ian. . . .”

The net effect of the pho­ny Oswald in Mex­i­co City was to rein­force the notion that a Com­mu­nist killed Kennedy, increas­ing pres­sure for retal­i­a­tion against Rus­sia and/or Cuba and esca­lat­ing Cold War ten­sions. ” . . . . One must give the CIA (and the assas­si­na­tion spon­sors that were even fur­ther in the shad­ows) their due for hav­ing devised and exe­cut­ed a bril­liant set­up. They had played out a sce­nario to Kennedy’s death in Dal­las that pres­sured oth­er gov­ern­ment author­i­ties to choose among three major options: a war of vengeance against Cuba and the Sovi­et Union based on the CIA’s false Mex­i­co City doc­u­men­ta­tion of a Com­mu­nist assas­si­na­tion plot; a domes­tic polit­i­cal war based on the same doc­u­ments seen tru­ly, but a war the CIA would fight with every covert weapon at its com­mand; or a com­plete cov­er-up of any con­spir­a­cy evi­dence and a silent coup d’etat that would reverse Kennedy’s efforts to end the Cold War. . . .” The pro­pa­gan­da blitzkrieg against Rus­sia over the high-pro­file hacks, Ukraine and Syr­ia have posi­tioned Hillary Clin­ton in an anal­o­gous fash­ion. It will be VERY dif­fi­cult for her to avoid being sucked into the New Cold War dynam­ics. Pro­gram High­lights Include: Review of the dis­in­for­ma­tion link­ing Oswald to the KGB’s alleged assas­si­na­tion of Stephan Ban­dera (head of the OUN/B); review of the role of Pierre Omid­yar in the Maid­an coup; review of Oswald’s alto­geth­er improb­a­ble activ­i­ties in the U.S., giv­en his sup­posed Com­mu­nist sta­tus.

FTR #925 Painting Oswald “Red,” Part 1

One of the nick­names Mr. Emory has bestowed upon “Eddie the Friend­ly Spook” Snow­den is “The Obverse Oswald.” Where­as Lee Har­vey Oswald was a U.S. intel­li­gence offi­cer infil­trat­ed into the Sovi­et Union, repa­tri­at­ed and infil­trat­ed into left­ist orga­ni­za­tions, giv­en a “left cov­er” and then framed for the assas­si­na­tion of J.F.K. (and killed before he could exon­er­ate him­self), Snow­den has been infil­trat­ed into Rus­sia and por­trayed as a hero. Snow­den, like Oswald, is involved in an “op.”
Just as Oswald was “paint­ed Red,” Rus­sia appears to have been framed in the U.S. media for the hack of the Demo­c­ra­t­ic Nation­al Com­mit­tee and the non-hack of NSA cyber­weapons by the so-called Shad­ow Bro­kers.

In this first of two pro­grams, we review the process of “paint­ing Oswald Red,” by way of gain­ing his­tor­i­cal per­spec­tive on the Snow­den “op” and the fram­ing of Rus­sia for the high-pro­file hacks in the New Cold War.

After review­ing par­tic­u­lars con­cern­ing the fram­ing of Rus­sia for the hacks, we detail the fram­ing of Lee Har­vey Oswald and the Sovi­et Union for the assas­si­na­tion of Stephan Ban­dera, the head of the fas­cist Ukrain­ian OUN/B.

Sup­pos­ed­ly exe­cut­ed by the KGB, the killing was almost cer­tain­ly done by the West, with the BND being the most like­ly agency involved.

Ele­ments of the W.A.C.C.F.L. (the fore­run­ner of the World Anti-Com­mu­nist League) dis­sem­i­nat­ed the dis­in­for­ma­tion that Oswald was trained by the same KGB sub-group that man­aged Bog­dan Stashyn­sky, the killer of Ban­dera.

After Oswald returned to the U.S., he was infil­trat­ed into the Fair Play For Cuba Com­mit­tee (he was its only New Orleans mem­ber). Oswald’s alleged pro-Cas­tro stance received con­sid­er­able expo­sure as a result of an inter­view he did with WDSU in New Orleans. That inter­view, arranged by the Infor­ma­tion Coun­cil of the Amer­i­c­as, fea­tured Oswald dis­cussing his Marx­ist sym­pa­thies and his “defec­tion” to the Sovi­et Union.

The Infor­ma­tion Coun­cil of the Amer­i­c­as had close links to the U.S. intel­li­gence com­mu­ni­ty. The net effect of the paint­ing of Oswald Red was to moti­vate lib­er­als and Pres­i­dent John­son to cov­er-up the truth con­cern­ing the assas­si­na­tion, out of fear that if the Amer­i­can pub­lic believed that Kennedy was killed as a result of a Com­mu­nist con­spir­a­cy, it could lead to a Third World War.

Pro­gram High­lights Include: Oswald’s WDSU gaffe in which he dis­closed his rela­tion­ship with the U.S. gov­ern­ment while in the U.S.S.R.; the high­ly unlike­ly fact that alleged K.G.B. oper­a­tive Stashyn­sky had the bro­ken key to Bandera’s apart­ment in his pos­ses­sion when he went to tri­al two years lat­er; the equal­ly unlike­ly propo­si­tion that the oth­er half of the bro­ken key was still in the lock of Bandera’s apart­ment two years lat­er!

FTR #920 The Trumpenkampfverbande, Part 3: The Underground Reich Emerges Into Plain View

QUICK: How many Pres­i­den­tial can­di­dates can you name who kept a book of Adolf Hitler’s speech­es by their bed­side? Don­ald Trump does. For many years, what Mr. Emory terms “The Under­ground Reich” has been a fun­da­men­tal point of dis­cus­sion and analy­sis in these broad­casts and posts. In the third pro­gram ana­lyz­ing the Don­ald Trump cam­paign, we exam­ine the “Trumpenkampfver­bande,” its polit­i­cal antecedents and adher­ents. Exem­pli­fy­ing, and net­work­ing with, gen­er­a­tions of fas­cists and fas­cist orga­ni­za­tions, the Trumpenkampfver­bande embod­ies the emer­gence of the Under­ground Reich into plain view. A sig­na­ture ele­ment of Trump’s cam­paign is his resus­ci­ta­tion of the “Amer­i­ca First” slo­gan and con­cept, a man­i­fes­ta­tion both of his thin­ly-veiled appeal to Nazi and white suprema­cist ele­ments and his will­ing­ness to cede dom­i­nance over world affairs to a Ger­man-dom­i­nat­ed “third pow­er bloc.” The Amer­i­ca First con­cept mobi­lizes pow­er­ful feel­ings among those feel­ing over­whelmed and left behind by polit­i­cal and eco­nom­ic devel­op­ments glob­al­ly and in the Unit­ed States. We note that the “orig­i­nal” Amer­i­ca First was financed by Nazi Ger­many. Trump’s invo­ca­tion of Amer­i­ca First exem­pli­fies the nature of his polit­i­cal her­itage and alle­giances. One of his top advis­ers Joseph E. Schmitz, “obsessed with all things Ger­man” and, accord­ing to asso­ciates, some­one who “fired the Jews” (from the Pen­ta­gon) and man­i­fest­ed Holo­caust denial. This is not atyp­i­cal of “Team Trump.” One of the most impor­tant fig­ures in main­stream­ing “alt right” (i.e. Nazi, white nation­al­ist and anti-Semit­ic) atti­tudes has been Breitbart’s Steve Ban­non, now essen­tial­ly run­ning the Trump cam­paign. Trump and his cam­paign have a habit of re-tweet­ing infor­ma­tion from “alt right” web­sites and mes­sage boards. Of pri­ma­ry sig­nif­i­cance in ana­lyz­ing Trump con­cerns the main finan­cial backer of his real estate projects–Deutsche Bank. In addi­tion to the fact that this places a poten­tial Pres­i­dent in the posi­tion of owing upwards of $100 mil­lion to an insti­tu­tion that has open­ly defied U.S. reg­u­la­to­ry posi­tions, Deutsche Bank is a pri­ma­ry ele­ment of the remark­able and dead­ly Bor­mann cap­i­tal net­work, about which we speak so often. Pro­gram High­lights Include: Analy­sis of the pos­si­bil­i­ty that Trump’s father was in the Ku Klux Klan; review of Trump’s asso­ci­a­tion with for­mer Axis spy Nor­man Vin­cent Peale; review of Trump’s counsel–Senator Joe McCarthy aide Roy Cohn; Trump’s addi­tion­al finan­cial back­ing from George Soros, who got his start in busi­ness “Aryaniz­ing” Jew­ish prop­er­ty dur­ing the Holo­caust; Trump’s tweet­ing of a cam­paign ad fea­tur­ing Waf­fen SS-clad World War II re-enac­tors; The enthu­si­as­tic sup­poprt Trump has received from David Duke.

FTR #919 The Trumpenkampfverbande, Part 2: German Ostpolitik, Part 2

Con­tin­u­ing our analy­sis of Don­ald Trump as a polit­i­cal ani­mal, the pro­gram returns to the sub­ject of tra­di­tion­al Ger­man “Ost­poli­tik.” As set forth in FTR #918, Ger­many has–for centuries–sought to sta­bi­lize its rela­tion­ship with Rus­sia in order to fur­ther its geopo­lit­i­cal hege­mon­ic goals. Begin­ning with the sub­ject of for­mer Trump cam­paign man­ag­er Paul Manafort’s work for the Rus­sia-allied Yanukovich gov­ern­ment in Ukraine, we note that avail­able evi­dence points to Man­afort as a cat’s paw for covert action and regime change. His clients in the past include for­mer Philip­pine dic­ta­tor Fer­di­nand Mar­cos, who did not share the Gold­en Lily wealth to the sat­is­fac­tion of the Unit­ed States and was sub­se­quent­ly over­thrown in a U.S.-backed coup. After review­ing Ger­man Ost­poli­tik as artic­u­lat­ed in the ear­ly 1950s by the Ade­nauer gov­ern­ment in Ger­many and Under­ground Reich Fifth Col­umn ele­ments in the U.S., the pro­gram notes that the basic goals of that ear­ly 1950s man­i­fes­ta­tion of the pol­i­cy have either been reached or are under devel­op­ment: a Ger­man-dom­i­nat­ed uni­fied Europe, a Ger­man-dom­i­nat­ed Euro­pean mil­i­tary struc­ture; a Ger­man-dom­i­nat­ed EU/Russian/Eurasian eco­nom­ic union stretch­ing from “Lis­bon to Vladi­vos­tok,” and the grad­ual piv­ot from the U.S. to Rus­sia as a crit­i­cal Ger­man ally (as reflect­ed in an impor­tant recent Ger­man poll.) The pro­gram notes that the com­plex, alto­geth­er opaque Trump real estate empire appar­ent­ly fronts for, among oth­er inter­ests, pow­er­ful Ger­man cor­po­ra­tions, fam­i­lies and indi­vid­u­als. Those inter­ests, as we have seen in FTR #305, are under the con­trol of the remark­able and dead­ly Bor­mann cap­i­tal net­work. Key Trump for­eign pol­i­cy advis­er Joseph E. Schmitz is obsessed “with all things Steuben” and “all things Ger­man” accord­ing to a for­mer col­league at the Pen­ta­gon. Schmitz’s broth­er John P. Schmitz is works with dom­i­nant Ger­man cor­po­ra­tions, plac­ing him in the same cor­po­rate land­scape as Trump and his real estate empire. It is our view that Trump’s pro­nounce­ments about Rus­sia, Ukraine and NATO are sim­i­lar in func­tion­al intent to the “Open Let­ter to Stal­in” pub­lished in the “Buerg­er Zeitung.” His stances in this regard are meant to pre­cip­i­tate what pro-Ade­nauer media sources termed “a bid­ding war” between the U.S. and Rus­sia, with Ger­many as the ben­e­fi­cia­ry of a ” . . . heat­ed atmos­phere of an auc­tion room where two eager oppo­nents out­bid each oth­er. . . .” Pro­gram High­lights Include: Review of John P. Schmitz’s rela­tion­ship to the Robert Bosch Foun­da­tion; review of the Bosch Foundation’s links to the Carl Duis­berg Gesellschaft, which spon­sored Mohamed Atta’s entry into the Unit­ed States; John P. Schmitz’s links to Matthias Wiss­man, and Wissman’s links to Holo­caust-relat­ed law­suits; Joseph E. Schmitz’s report­ed anti-Semi­tism and Holo­caust revi­sion­ism: “ . . . .‘His sum­ma­ry of his tenure’s achieve­ment report­ed as ‘…I fired the Jews,’ . . . . ‘In his final days, he alleged­ly lec­tured [for­mer Pen­ta­gon Inspec­tor Gen­er­al] Mr. [John] Crane on the details of con­cen­tra­tion camps and how the ovens were too small to kill 6 mil­lion Jews,’ . . . .”; review of Joseph E. Schmitz’s post-Pen­ta­gon work as head of the par­ent com­pa­ny of Black­wa­ter.

Jaroslav Stetsko’s Personal Secretary Serves as the Azov Battalion’s Spokesman

The spokesman–and apologist–for the Nazi Azov Bat­tal­ion in Ukraine is Roman Zvarych. Zvarych was the per­son­al sec­re­tary to Jaroslav Stetsko–the head of the World War II Nazi col­lab­o­ra­tionist OUN/B gov­ern­ment. Azov is now receiv­ing U.S. gov­ern­ment fund­ing. All of the con­tents of this web­site as of 12/19/2014–Dave Emory’s 35+ years of research and broadcasting–as well as hours of video­taped lec­tures are avail­able on a 32GB flash dri­ve. Dave offers his pro­grams and arti­cles for free–your sup­port is very much appre­ci­at­ed.

FTR #907 Update on Ukraine

Sup­ple­ment­ing our many pre­vi­ous pro­grams on Ukraine, this broad­cast fur­ther devel­ops the Orwellian re-write of World War II his­to­ry, as well as chron­i­cling the deep polit­i­cal his­to­ry of the Ukrain­ian dias­po­ra, its alliance with the Third Reich and its pro­found pres­ence pri­or to, and dur­ing, World War II. An arti­cle in “For­eign Policy”–a main­stream publication–notes the role of Volodymyr Via­tro­vych in turn­ing Ukrain­ian World War II his­to­ry on its head.

Hired orig­i­nal­ly by Vik­tor Yuschenko to head the Orwellian-named “Insti­tute for Nation­al Mem­o­ry,” Via­tro­vych decamped to the U.S. after the elec­tion of the Yanukovich gov­ern­ment, only to return to Ukraine and resume his revi­sion­ist work under Petro Poroshenko. Recast­ing the Third Reich allies and geno­ci­dal col­lab­o­ra­tors of the OUN/B as heroes and res­cuers of Jews dur­ing the Holo­caust, Via­tro­vych has been com­ple­ment­ed in his work by educ­tion min­is­ter Ser­hiy Kvit and Yuriy Shukhevych, the son of UPA chief Roman Shukhevych. (The UPA was the mil­i­tary wing of the OUN/B.) In Ukraine, it is now a crime to say any­thing crit­i­cal about the OUN/B or UPA.

The mea­sure of the revi­sion­ism under­way in Ukraine can be gauged by this state­ment about UPA pol­i­cy toward the Poles: “. . . . UPA supreme com­man­der Dmytro Kliachkivs’kyi explic­it­ly stat­ed: ‘We should car­ry out a large-scale liq­ui­da­tion action against Pol­ish ele­ments. Dur­ing the evac­u­a­tion of the Ger­man Army, we should find an appro­pri­ate moment to liq­ui­date the entire male pop­u­la­tion between 16 and 60 years old.’ Giv­en that over 70 per­cent of the lead­ing UPA cadres pos­sessed a back­ground as Nazi col­lab­o­ra­tors, none of this is sur­pris­ing. . . .” Recount­ing that quote would be a crime in Ukraine!

Much of the pro­gram con­sists of a recount­ing of the Ukrain­ian Fifth Col­umn in the Unit­ed States and its col­lab­o­ra­tion with the Third Reich. The Ger­man Gen­er­al Staff had been groom­ing Ukraini­ans as allies dur­ing the clos­ing stages of the First World War and its after­math, cul­mi­nat­ing with the for­ma­tion of the OUN as an exten­sion of Nazi impe­r­i­al designs. Embed­ded with ele­ments of our mil­i­tary, the Ukrain­ian Fifth Col­umn were active­ly engaged in crim­i­nal activ­i­ties, includ­ing sab­o­tage of key Amer­i­can infra­struc­ture tar­gets.

The peri­od­i­cal of the OUN was titled “Svo­bo­da,” now the name of one of the key OUN/B suc­ces­sor orga­ni­za­tions in pow­er in Ukraine.

Pro­gram High­lights Include: the Pelypenko affair, in which a Ukrain­ian Ortho­dox priest and Gestapo agent dis­closed the dimen­sions and work­ings of the Nazi/Ukrainian Fifth Col­umn in the U.S.; Svo­bo­da par­ty mem­ber Andriy Paru­biy’s ele­va­tion to being speak­er of the Ukrain­ian par­lia­ment; review of Vik­tor Yuschenko’s strong ties to the Ukrain­ian-Amer­i­can branch­es of the OUN/B; dis­cus­sion of the bogus law degree of incom­ing Prime Min­is­ter Volodomyr Groys­man, obtained from MAUP Uni­ver­si­ty, the epi­cen­ter of anti-Semi­tism in Ukraine; review of David Duke’s role as a fac­ul­ty mem­ber at MAUP; the assign­ment of a con­tin­gent of the Nazi Azov bat­tal­ion to “main­tain order” in Odessa, the site of a mas­sacre-by-fire of eth­nic Russ­ian pro­test­ers in 2014.

Why Were the Immigration Files on Tamerlan Tsarnaev So Heavily Redacted?

In FTR #773, among oth­er pro­grams and posts, we not­ed that the Boston Marathon bomb­ing appears to have been blow­back from ongo­ing covert “ops” using Islamist proxy war­riors in the Earth Island. The heavy cen­sor­ship of Tamer­lan Tsar­naev’s immi­gra­tion files rein­forces the sus­pi­cion that there is infor­ma­tion about the bombers that is too sen­si­tive to be released. All of the con­tents of this web­site as of 12/19/2014–Dave Emory’s 35+ years of research and broadcasting–as well as hours of video­taped lec­tures are avail­able on a 32GB flash dri­ve. Dave offers his pro­grams and arti­cles for free–your sup­port is very much appre­ci­at­ed.

FTR #886 What the Hell Does Dave Emory Mean by “The Earth Island Boogie?,” Part 3: Geopolitical Quicksand

Ana­lyz­ing the pos­si­bil­i­ty that Amer­i­can use of Mus­lim Broth­er­hood Islamists as proxy war­riors and armed her­alds of cor­po­ratist free-mar­ket eco­nom­ic val­ues might back­fire on the Unit­ed States, we look at the devel­op­ment of ISIS, the curi­ous Turk­ish about-face on the Fetul­lah Gulen orga­ni­za­tion and fall­out from the so-called “Arab Spring.” Begin­ning with dis­cus­sion of a “dooms­day” con­tin­gency plan con­coct­ed by al-Qae­da and Sad­dam Hus­sein to back each oth­er up mil­i­tar­i­ly in the event either or both were over­thrown by the U.S., we exam­ine the promi­nent role of for­mer mem­bers of Sad­dam’s offi­cer corps in admin­is­ter­ing ISIS. ISIS and al-Qae­da are hold­ing forth in Libya, which is serv­ing as a base for spread­ing their oper­a­tions into Africa. Like the bloody Syr­i­an civ­il war, the over­throw of Khadafy (which set the stage for the Islamist pres­ence in Libya) is an out­growth of the so-called “Arab Spring”–one of the “con­ga-line ops” we high­light­ed in FTR #885. Much of the pro­gram high­lights the oper­a­tions of the Fetul­lah Gulen orga­ni­za­tion in Turkey. Alleged to be a CIA front orga­ni­za­tion and Islam­ic extrem­ist in nature, the Gulen orga­ni­za­tion was for­mer­ly an ally of Tayyip Erdo­gan. Now, it is among his most bit­ter oppo­nents. Pro­gram High­lights Include: review of Hitler’s view that Islamists were a cru­cial Third Reich ally; review of a crit­i­cal meet­ing in Switzer­land at which promi­nent Euro-fas­cists and al-Taqwa direc­tor Ahmed Huber met; spec­u­la­tion that the Swiss “Euro-fas­cist” sum­mit may have helped gen­er­ate the intel­li­gence dis­in­for­ma­tion that helped lure the Bush admin­is­tra­tion into the ill-advised Iraq war; “ex” CIA offi­cer Gra­ham Fuller’s ridicule of the alle­ga­tion that the Gulen orga­ni­za­tion is a CIA front orga­ni­za­tion; the close con­nec­tions between Erdo­gan’s AKP Par­ty, Ger­many and the EU.